October202013

Paris, 21 October 2013 — After more than four years of secret negotiations, the text of the Canada-Europe trade agreement, CETA, reached agreement in principle during a meeting between José Barroso, the President of the European Commission, and Stefen Harper, the Canadian Prime Minister. While waiting for evidence to ensure that CETA does not contain measures endangering our freedoms online, citizens and MEPs should be ready to reject this trade agreement.

Karel De Gutch

As was the case in the negotiations of ACTA and today in those of TAFTA, the negotiations of CETA, the Canada-Europe trade agreement, were conducted behind closed doors, between 2009 and 2013, by a small group of individuals led by Karel De Gucht1 for Europe and Ed Fast2 for Canada. Despite repeated requests from both European and Canadian citizens, organizations and elected representatives, no official version of CETA has been made ​​public up to date. This opacity is all the more worrying as the last leaked version of the agreement, in July 2012, contained ACTA-like provisions, and documents3 issued by both Canadians and European institutions continue to refer to measures related to the protection of “intellectual property” (in particular patents and copyright).

These documents still refer to a “reinforcement” of the copyright protection. Until the text has been published, one cannot exclude the possible return of measures already rejected with ACTA. Even if it is not the case, the agreement provisions could limit in practice the benefits of the Canadian approach to copyright. Canada has a more extensive definition of the public domain, and has also introduced a pioneering law for positive user rights4 (for example regarding the education exception). Though the Canadian government has stated that it would not have to revise the C-11 law because of the agreement, this remain to be checked – let's remember similar statements regarding the compatibility of ACTA with the Community acquis that proved completely wrong. Even if the law is not revised, the de facto access to many public domain works could be threatened by changes regarding the enforcement of copyright.

Reflecting TAFTA, the situation demonstrates that CETA negotiators have failed to, or could not, learn from the ACTA fiasco and hear the calls from citizens. Rather than negotiated in opacity, these issues must be discussed in democratic and open debates. Continue to circumvent the legitimate processes to impose repressive measures, on the pretext of trade agreements, can only contribute to feed the citizens mistrust for representatives and European institutions. Thus, La Quadrature du Net joins requests calling for immediate publication of documents relating to CETA and urges citizens and MEPs to be ready to reject this new trade agreement.

“Now that an agreement in principle was reached, CETA will enter into the legislative process of the European Parliament, which will ultimately lead the MEPs to vote for adopt or reject the agreement as a whole. A few months before the 2013 European elections, there is an urgent need for the European institutions to hear the citizen rejection of these illegitimate practices, and to finally opt for transparent and democratic processes.” concluded Jérémie Zimmermann, spokesperson for citizen advocacy group La Quadrature du Net

1. Karel De Gucht is the European Commissioner for Trade, also in charge of ACTA and TAFTA, who did not hesitate to lie to the European Parliament in his effort to convince the Parliament to adopt these dispositions.

Paris, 8 July 2013 — Today begins in Washington DC the first round of negotiations of the Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement, TAFTA (also known as TTIP1), amid concerns about the legitimacy of negotiating such a text under espionage by the US government. La Quadrature du Net publishes a leaked document [pdf] [text] showing that the EU is already preparing to attack citizens' freedoms online, turning TAFTA into a “super-ACTA”. La Quadrature calls on citizens to mobilize and calls negotiators to communicate TAFTA texts to the public as soon as they enter in their possession.

Karel De Gucht

From 8 to 11 July 2013 in Washington DC, negotiators from the US and the EU (represented by the European Commission) will negotiate the first round of TAFTA, the Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement. Their discussion will likely attempt to determine the scope of agreement. Among the numerous "non-tariff", "regulatory issues" that have already been announced as part of the negotiations, one can look at a great range of issues such as access to medication, food safety, investor-state litigation and finance, copyright, patents, etc. It is highly questionable that any of these issues, critical for structuring our societies and determining our everyday life, could be better addressed by closed-door negotiations of a trade agreement between unelected representatives rather than debated democratically in Parliament.

La Quadrature du Net publishes a document from the EU negotiators of TAFTA [pdf] [text], related to Internet. It shows alarmingly that they intend to negotiate rules that could potentially have a deep impact on the Internet, with among others:

liability of Internet service providers: the European legal framework guarantees that service providers have no obligation to police and censor their networks. Altering this regime is precisely what entertainment industry wants and almost got through ACTA.

electronic commerce: various provisions concerning consumers' protection, including the processing of their personal data for commercial purpose would be included in TAFTA.

cyber-security: in a context of massive, generalized surveillance of our data by US intelligence agencies, the EU negotiators seem ready to deal how information about "security" should be shared with the US.

These are only examples of how critical parts of legislation could be negotiated within TAFTA, all of them bearing huge potential risks for our freedoms online. Not only the EU negotiators could commit to weaken protections of citizens' freedoms or free competition, but they could also ensure that bad EU legislation could never be revoked, by turning them into "gold standards". The precedent of ACTA shows that industries can have tremendous (if not total) influence on the content of such an agreement, and that EU negotiators from the Commission can hardly be trusted to defend general interest, as demonstrated by their chief, Commissioner De Gucht's outright lies to EU citizens and Parliament.

La Quadrature du Net calls on all citizens to mobilize and ask for the publication of any text proposed or negotiated behind the closed doors of TAFTA. The citizen organization also launches a solemn call to all of the (about 80) officials involved in the negotiations: “Honour democratic values and justice by leaking documents from TAFTA and contribute to foster transparency and public debate on these crucial issues!”

1. TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) is an attempt to rename TAFTA in a positive-sounding manner, "partnership", while avoiding to be too pronounceable or to sound too similar in pronunciation as "ACTA"

Paris, 4 July 2013 — Today, exactly one year after the final rejection of ACTA, the European Parliament adopted a resolution in strong reaction to the massive spying by the USA. Our representatives have failed to demand that the upcoming secret negotiations of trans-atlantic trade agreement be frozen. In a context where EU officials are being spied upon by US counterparts, this upcoming “super-ACTA” will be born with very little legitimacy.

It has been one year to the day since a massive, global and decentralized citizen movement helped defeat ACTA, (the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement), a historic victory against governments attempting to attack our fundamental rights online.

Today the European Parliament adopted a resolution about PRISM and the massive, generalized surveillance programs of the NSA, in the wake of the recent revelations about the spying of all EU officials by the USA.

The Parliament failed to adopt amendments calling for the postponing of the negotiations of the Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement or TAFTA (also known as TTIP1). As the EU Commission – whose representative in charge of TAFTA, Karel De Gucht, openly lied to the EU people and to the Parliament – announced that negotiations should move on, the Parliament now gives it the green light. It is an alarming sign for EU democracy that should get citizens mobilized.

As both parties have already made clear, the upcoming TAFTA will be used as a vector to alter EU “regulatory issues” ranging from access to medicine, food safety, or finance. Like ACTA, it will also include provisions on copyright enforcement, and may affect the whole Internet ecosystem. It is set, by design, to be another attempt to circumvent democracy and undermine our fundamental rights online.

“In a context where all communications between EU negotiators will potentially be available to their US counterpart, how could the EU Commission be in a strong position to negotiate and defend citizens' freedoms? How could the negotiation be balanced? Among others, the will of negotiators to discuss 'data flows' instead of enforcing EU citizens fundamental right to privacy shows how these negotiations could once again be used to bow to the pressure of the US and its industries. In a context of massive spying of EU citizens' communication by US institutions and corporations, TAFTA would turn into yet another illegitimate agreement betraying EU citizens.” declares Jérémie Zimmermann, spokesperson for the citizen organisation La Quadrature du Net.

1. TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) is an attempt to rename TAFTA in a positive-sounding manner, "partnership", while avoiding to be too pronounceable or to sound too similar in pronunciation as "ACTA"

Paris, 23 May 2013 — In a plenary vote, the European Parliament just adopted a mandate to the European Commission explicitly allowing it to “include strong protection of intellectual property rights (IPR)” in the proposed EU-US trade agreement negociations, the “Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement” (TAFTA), also know as “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership” (TTIP).

Remaining deaf to the calls of civil society and academics, the Members of the European Parliament chose to run the risk that this new trade agreement will include the same kind of repressive measures they voted down last year by rejecting ACTA. Every amendment requesting more transparency for the process got rejected. From now on and in each round of negotiations until the final text, citizens must remain vigilant and keep the EU Commission and other negotiators accountable, to obtain draft texts, and to call on their elected representatives to be consistent with their vote against ACTA, determined to oppose any repressive copyright enforcement provisions.

“MEPs gave the go to the inclusion in TAFTA of copyright and patent enforcement provisions, against the demands of European and international organisations. This decision is the first step to a new trade agreement which could hurt our fundamental freedoms and a free Internet in the name of protecting the interests of the entertainment industry. From a democratic perspective, it is essential for all forthcoming negotiations to be transparent and respectful of fundamental rights that we, citizens, play a role in the process.” declares Jérémie Zimmermann, spokesperson for the citizen organisation La Quadrature du Net.

Paris, 17 May 2013 — On 22 May, the European Parliament will vote in plenary on a resolution on the proposed EU-US trade agreement, the “Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement” (TAFTA), also know as “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership” (TTIP). After the ACTA, SOPA and PIPA battles, once again the entertainment industry will try to use a trade agreement as an opportunity to impose online repression. With Wednesday's vote, Members of the European Parliament may be about to vote in favor of the same kind of repressive copyright enforcement provisions that they rejected in ACTA a few months ago.

The European Parliament may be about to adopt a mandate to the European Commission explicitly allowing it to negotiate in TAFTA what they have rejected last year with ACTA, as the current version of the resolution that will be put to vote on Wednesday proposes to “include strong protection of intellectual property rights (IPR)”.

Members of the European Parliament may still have an occasion to remove copyright, patent and trademarks provisions from the negotiation mandate, and avoid an undemocratic trade agreement that will inflict the worst of both regimes’ rules on the other party, while making it impossible to go backwards on failed repressive measures. A few months away from the elections, will they once again follow the industry, or rather go the way of the civil society declaration “IP out of TAFTA” released by almost 50 European and International organisations?

2. “[The EU Parliament] stresses that intellectual property is one of the driving forces of innovation and creation and a pillar of the knowledge-based economy and that the agreement should include strong protection of precisely and clearly defined areas of intellectual property rights (IPR), including geographical indications, and be consistent with international agreements; believes that other areas of divergence in IPR should be solved in line with international standards of protection.”

April252013

Paris, 25 April 2013 — Today, the “International Trade” (INTA) committee of the European Parliament adopted a resolution1 on the proposed EU-US trade agreement – the “Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement” (TAFTA), also touted as the “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership” (TTIP). The Parliament unfortunately decided to ignore the calls of civil society groups to keep “IP out of TAFTA”.

The members of the EU Parliament decided to encourage the inclusion of copyright, patent and trademarks in the negotiating mandate of the EU Commission, by adopting the following “compromise amendment”:

[The EU Parliament] stresses that intellectual property is one of the driving forces of innovation and creation and a pillar of the knowledge-based economy and that the agreement should include strong protection of precisely and clearly defined areas of intellectual property rights (IPR), including geographical indications, and be consistent with international agreements; believes that other areas of divergence in IPR should be solved in line with international standards of protection.

All the amendments calling on excluding provisions related to so-called “intellectual property” from TAFTA, as well as those calling for a more sensible approach to copyright and patent enforcement, were rejected.

“The European Parliament is not ready to draw lessons from the massive citizen mobilisation against ACTA last year. It has decided to stick to 'business as usual' by calling once again for a 'strong protection' of copyright and patent whereas the US and the EU already suffer from the most maximalist regimes in this field. After the ACTA fight, the negotiators of this new trade agreement – and in particular EU Trade commissioner Karel de Gucht – may once again attempt to use undemocratic negotiations to impose online repression in the name of copyright enforcement. Citizens must remain vigilant to influence the negotiations at the national level, and be watchful of EU institutions so as to avoid the worst.” declared Jérémie Zimmermann, spokesperson for citizen advocacy group La Quadrature du Net.

Paris, 24 April 2013 — On 25 April next, the “International Trade” (INTA) committee of the European Parliament will vote on a draft resolution on the proposed EU-US trade agreement, the “Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement” (TAFTA), also touted as the “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership” (TTIP). After the ACTA, SOPA, PIPA and CETA fights, once again the negotiators of this new trade agreement try to use it as an opportunity to impose online repression. With Thursday's vote, Members of the European Parliament can and must remove “intellectual property” provisions from the negotiations, and avoid an undemocratic trade agreement that will inflict the worst of both regimes’ rules on the other party. Instead, the current version of the resolution that will be put to vote on Thursday proposes to “include strong protection of intellectual property rights (IPR)” in TAFTA.

Following the Civil Society Declaration “IP out of TAFTA” released by almost 50 European and International organisations, La Quadrature du Net calls on MEPs to exclude from the upcoming TAFTA any provisions related to patents, copyright, trademarks, trade secrets, or other forms of so-called “intellectual property” rights. To this effect, La Quadrature du Net publishes a voting list for the key amendments.

On 28 November 2011, the European Union and United States set up a high-level working group on growth and jobs, aiming at finding accurate solutions to the economical crisis. On 13 February 2013, the final report – which resulted from a year-long consultation of key industrial players – stressed the need for a Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (TAFTA). Barely 10 months have passed since the MEPs supported by European citizens and civil society organisations voted to unconditionally reject ACTA, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. At the time, civil society groups and citizens across Europe called for more openness and transparency. A call that still needs to be heard today, in the context of new trade talks.

No transparency on pre-negotiation and negotiation texts means no guarantees for the European citizens. In 2010, the EU Ombudsman1underlined that citizens had to be informed about ACTA. Citizens should be informed of any provision which could infringe their fundamental rights, especially freedom of speech, the right to a fair trial and access to knowledge.

The decision-making process on TAFTA is still in its infancy. On Thursday, the European Parliament will vote to mandate the EU Commission to lead negotiations with the United States. The Council decision is expected before the summer break.

In order for the European Parliament to send a clear signal, La Quadrature du Net calls the INTA MEPs:

to adopt amendments excluding provisions related to so-called “intellectual property” from TAFTA, as well as those calling for a more sensible approach to copyright enforcement and transparency on the upcoming negotiations, such as amendments 12, 673, 1144 and 1215.

to reject amendments calling for the inclusion of stronger copyright enforcement in TAFTA, in particular amendment 1156 and 1197.

The complete list of the amendments is available here and La Quadrature's voting list for the key amendments is here.

Once again, La Quadrature du Net demands the general exclusion of any provisions in trade agreements that undermine fundamental freedoms, the development of free software or access to affordable generic drugs for millions of people; it calls on INTA MEPs to take into account the opinions expressed last year by citizens during anti-ACTA mobilizations during Thursday's vote.

“This resolution vote of the 'International Trade' committee is a key opportunity to exclude any forms of so-called 'intellectual property' from TAFTA. MEPs can make clear that repressive measures threatening our fundamental freedoms have nothing to do in this new trade agreement. European institutions must hear the citizen rejection of ACTA. It is critical to avoid a precedent of undemocratic processes injecting copyright enforcement provisions in all trade agreements. It's time to make global copyright law more flexible and fit for the digital era!” concluded Philippe Aigrain, co-founder of citizen advocacy group La Quadrature du Net.

1. An ombudsman is an official elected by the European Parliament, with a significant degree of independence. He is charged with representing the interests of the public by investigating and addressing complaints of maladministration or violation of rights.

2.Amendment 1Marietje Schaake (Netherlands - ALDE) proposes to add the text in bold to the following paragraph:

– having regard to its earlier resolutions, in particular the resolution of 23 October 2012 on trade and economic relations with the United States; and of 15 November 2012 on a digital freedom strategy in EU Foreign Policy,

4. Notes the release of the HLWG Final Report and endorses the recommendation to launch negotiations for a comprehensive trade and investment agreement;

by:

4. Notes the release of the HLWG Final Report; recommends to postpone the decision to launch negotiations for a comprehensive trade and investment agreement until a high quality impact assessment has been prepared, and a transparent, informative and comprehensive consultations with all economic stakeholders and the civil society have been conducted, including among others trade unions, organisations from the agricultural sector, environmental organisations, organisations working on civil liberties, internet freedom and data protection, health costs, financial market regulations, and cultural diversity issues;

11. Stresses that the agreement must include strong protection of intellectual property rights (IPR), including geographical indications; believes that other areas of divergence in IPR should be solved in line with international standards of protection;

11a. Stresses that given the rejection of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), prompted by concerns about restrictions on digital freedoms and the open internet, online copyright enforcement, as well as intermediary liability, these measures should not be included or aimed at in the TTIP agreement, neither by explicitly binding provisions nor by introducing or committing to restrictive interpretation or implementation of relevant EU law;

11. Stresses that the agreement must include strong protection of intellectual property rights (IPR), including geographical indications; believes that other areas of divergence in IPR should be solved in line with international standards of protection;

by:

11. Stresses that it is essential for this agreement to guarantee maximum protection levels and the effective implementation of provisions concerning personal data and intellectual and industrial property rights, including geographical indications;

11. Stresses that the agreement must include strong protection of intellectual property rights (IPR), including geographical indications; believes that other areas of divergence in IPR should be solved in line with international standards of protection

March152013

IP out of TAFTA

Civil Society Declaration released by 38 European and International organisations, to exclude from the upcoming Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (TAFTA) any provisions related to patents, copyright, trademarks, data protection, geographical indications, or other forms of so-called “intellectual property”.

Last year, millions of Americans told their government not to undermine the open internet. We sent the SOPA and PIPA bills down to defeat.

Soon after, hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets of Europe to protest against ACTA, a secretive trade agreement that would have violated our rights online and chilled generic drug competition.

Meanwhile, leaked trade texts revealed US and EU threats to access to affordable medicines, which significantly disrupted trade talks in India and the Pacific.

On February 13, the US President Barack Obama, the European Council President Herman Van Rompuy, and the European Commission President José Manuel Barroso announced the official launch of negotiations of a Transatlantic Free Trade Agreement (TAFTA)—also touted as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, or TTIP.

We, the undersigned, are internet freedom and public health groups, activists, and other public interest leaders dedicated to the rights of all people to access cultural and educational resources and affordable medicines, to enjoy a free and open internet, and to benefit from open and needs-driven innovation.

First, we insist that the European Union and United States release, in timely and ongoing fashion, any and all negotiating or pre-negotiation texts. We believe that secretive “trade” negotiations are absolutely unacceptable forums for devising binding rules that change national non-trade laws.

Past trade agreements negotiated by the US and EU have significantly increased the privileges of multinational corporations at the expense of society in general. Provisions in these agreements can, among many other concerns, limit free speech, constrain access to educational materials such as textbooks and academic journals, and, in the case of medicines, raise healthcare costs and contribute to preventable suffering and death.

Unless “intellectual property” is excluded from these talks, we fear that the outcome will be an agreement that inflicts the worst of both regimes’ rules on the other party. From a democratic perspective, we believe that important rules governing technology, health, and culture should be debated in the US Congress, the European Parliament, national parliaments, and other transparent forums where all stakeholders can be heard—not in closed negotiations that give privileged access to corporate insiders.

The TAFTA negotiations must not lead to a rewriting of patent and copyright rules in a way that tilts the balance even further away from the interests of citizens.

February272013

Paris, 26 February 2013 – Hadopi, the French "three strikes" administration, released yesterday a report [fr] on the fight against streaming and direct download sites. It advocates for the establishment of measures bearing a close resemblance to those of ACTA and the US SOPA bill, both shelved following a strong citizen mobilization for the defense of fundamental freedoms. Currently confined to the fight against file sharing between individuals, Hadopi now wants to extend its control to Internet intermediaries such as hosting services, search engines, Internet service providers or online payment services. Doing so, could only lead them to actively monitor content shared on the Net, with unavoidable collateral damage to freedom of expression, the protection of privacy and the right to a fair trial.

European law clearly states that hosting services cannot be forced to engage in general surveillance of content1. In its report, Hadopi suggests circumventing this limitation by encouraging Internet access and service providers to implement pro-active censorship measures as part of commercial agreements signed with industrial actors. Platforms that refuse to accept these new requirements could face domain name confiscation or censorship by public authorities. The report also proposes actions against search engines to delist given websites or to use censorship systems to block access to these. These schemes mirror the abusive provisions denounced in ACTA and SOPA: increasing Internet Intermediaries' liability, bypassing the judicial authority and moving towards contractual forms of online communication control, leading in turn to private censorship of the Internet.

La Quadrature du Net restates that the best way to fight against for-profit copyright infringement is to legalize non-market sharing between individuals within a clearly defined scope, in order to promote decentralized sharing (peer-to-peer) at the expense of (for-profit) centralized streaming or direct download platforms. To keep advocating for a blind war on sharing, as the Hadopi does, with no distinction between these different practices, will inevitably lead to a repressive spiral detrimental to fundamental freedoms. This report is all the more worrying that it reflects the approach of the working group lead by Pierre Lescure (former CEO of Canal +, major TV station owned by Universal) currently advising the French government on the future of Hadopi. This working group seems to be moving towards means to fight for-profit copyright infringement inspired by ACTA or the American SOPA bill, that is to say, directly inspired by the entertainment industry.

“The French government would be foolish to ignore the previous rejection of ACTA and SOPA. Citizens have shown that they are capable of mobilizing when an unfair, dangerous, and disproportionate approach to copyright threatens their freedoms. The same causes produce the same effects: those who sow ACTA shall reap the citizen whirlwind!” declared Jérémie Zimmermann, spokesperson for citizen advocacy group La Quadrature du Net.